ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILWAY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
DAVID J. HOBBS, DEFENDANT IN ERROR

Fla. | 1916-02-05
All concur, except Cockrell, J., absent by reason of sickness.
71 Fla. 109 Florida Supreme Court (1916) Positive Treatment
Cited by 10 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for personal injury and property damage, holding that the jury failed to properly diminish damages in proportion to the plaintiff's contributory negligence as required by statute.


Holding

No, the jury did not properly diminish the damages in proportion to the plaintiff's fault. The amount of damages awarded indicates a failure to comply with the statutory requirement.


Key Quotes

“Where the amount of damages awarded indicates that the jury did not diminish the damages sustained by the plaintiff in proportion to the fault attributable to the plaintiff as required by the statute, the judgment will be reversed.”

Establishes the legal principle for reversing a judgment when damages are not properly reduced due to plaintiff's negligence.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

David J. Hobbs obtained a $1,500 judgment against the Atlantic Coast Line Railway for injuries to himself and his automobile sustained in a collision …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Hobbs obtained a judgment for $1,500.00 against the railroad company for injuries to himself and, his automobile sustained by a collision at a railroad crossing on a street in a town, and the company took writ of error. The proven value of the automobile injury is perhaps less than $400.00, and the personal injuries were not very great. There is evidence that the plaintiff as well as the defendant was negligent, in which case the statute requires the damages to be diminished in proportion to the amount of default attributable to the plaintiff. Sec. 3149 Gen. Stats. of 1906. Where the amount of damages awarded indicates that the jury did not diminish the damages sustained by the plaintiff in proportion to the fault attributable to the plaintiff as required by the statute, the judgment will be reversed. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Weir, 63 Fla. 69, 58 South. Rep. 641.

The judgment is reversed and a new trial awarded.

All concur, except Cockrell, J., absent by reason of sickness.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Blankfeld v. Richmond Health Care, Inc., 902 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
  • Cilento v. State, 377 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 1979)
  • Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Townsend, 104 Fla. 362 (Fla. 1932)
    …e defendant as alleged is duly shown, the damages awarded to the plaintiff were not diminished in proportion to the amount of default attributable to him,” as is expressly required by the statute. Section 7052 (4965) C. G. L.; A. C. L. Ry. v. Hobbs, 71 Fla. 109, 70 So. 939. As liability for the alleged negligence of the defendant is not clearly established, a remittitur as for excessive damages awarded should not be suggested. The judgment should be and is reversed for a new trial. See T. & G. C. R. Co. v…

Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw